Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the Tories ultimate aim privatisation of the NHS. See Scotland are planning to charge wealthy person for access to NHS. I presume that this is the precursor to means tested treatment. For all, those that work hard and lucky enough to earn a decent wage will be hammered no doubt. Those super wealthy who paying for medical treatment would be a drop in the ocean aren't going to be effected. But I've no doubt that five/ ten years hence maybe sooner even those working their arses off and just about surviving will end up paying. With an American style insurance system introduced. Yet guarantee that we will still have to pay taxes,NI etc.." How do you believe they will privatise the NHS? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening. The blue “NHS” is already a brand mechanism rather than a single entity. As soon as you introduce the profit motive into healthcare (to create shareholder value) it means only one of two things can happen (or both): 1. They charge more for a service (fleecing taxpayers). 2. They offer a substandard service wrapped up in “efficiency” labels. The NHS does have problems, many caused by our ageing and obese population. Others caused by recruitment and retention problems (exacerbated by removing grants for trainee nurses and doctors along with real term pay cuts). However, these problems are made worse by the requirement to extract profit for those areas already privatised. It will only get worse." Sonwhat percentage of the NHS budget goes tk the private sector. What's the change over the years since 1980? Interested in seeing these figures. As it should be reflected in them wouldn't you agree? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening. The blue “NHS” is already a brand mechanism rather than a single entity. As soon as you introduce the profit motive into healthcare (to create shareholder value) it means only one of two things can happen (or both): 1. They charge more for a service (fleecing taxpayers). 2. They offer a substandard service wrapped up in “efficiency” labels. The NHS does have problems, many caused by our ageing and obese population. Others caused by recruitment and retention problems (exacerbated by removing grants for trainee nurses and doctors along with real term pay cuts). However, these problems are made worse by the requirement to extract profit for those areas already privatised. It will only get worse. Sonwhat percentage of the NHS budget goes tk the private sector. What's the change over the years since 1980? Interested in seeing these figures. As it should be reflected in them wouldn't you agree?" Surprised you don’t already have all that data? Surely worth a few FOIs Morley? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening. The blue “NHS” is already a brand mechanism rather than a single entity. As soon as you introduce the profit motive into healthcare (to create shareholder value) it means only one of two things can happen (or both): 1. They charge more for a service (fleecing taxpayers). 2. They offer a substandard service wrapped up in “efficiency” labels. The NHS does have problems, many caused by our ageing and obese population. Others caused by recruitment and retention problems (exacerbated by removing grants for trainee nurses and doctors along with real term pay cuts). However, these problems are made worse by the requirement to extract profit for those areas already privatised. It will only get worse." Exactly and it will continue to get worse as that's the aim of the rich lord's to line the pockets of their wealthy friends and themselves. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the Tories ultimate aim privatisation of the NHS. See Scotland are planning to charge wealthy person for access to NHS. I presume that this is the precursor to means tested treatment. For all, those that work hard and lucky enough to earn a decent wage will be hammered no doubt. Those super wealthy who paying for medical treatment would be a drop in the ocean aren't going to be effected. But I've no doubt that five/ ten years hence maybe sooner even those working their arses off and just about surviving will end up paying. With an American style insurance system introduced. Yet guarantee that we will still have to pay taxes,NI etc.." The NHS in Scotland is run by the Scottish government. So any criticism of NHS Scotland should be aimed at the SNP not some cheap snipe towards the Conservatives. As for privatisation of MHS England maybe you should look at what the last Labour government done with privatisation of parts of it when they were in power. For example, it's costing the NHS £Millions to use new hospitals they don't own and never will own under the deal agreed by Labour. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening. The blue “NHS” is already a brand mechanism rather than a single entity. As soon as you introduce the profit motive into healthcare (to create shareholder value) it means only one of two things can happen (or both): 1. They charge more for a service (fleecing taxpayers). 2. They offer a substandard service wrapped up in “efficiency” labels. The NHS does have problems, many caused by our ageing and obese population. Others caused by recruitment and retention problems (exacerbated by removing grants for trainee nurses and doctors along with real term pay cuts). However, these problems are made worse by the requirement to extract profit for those areas already privatised. It will only get worse. Sonwhat percentage of the NHS budget goes tk the private sector. What's the change over the years since 1980? Interested in seeing these figures. As it should be reflected in them wouldn't you agree? Surprised you don’t already have all that data? Surely worth a few FOIs Morley?" I hope this link is allowed (sorry mods if not) https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/articles/big-election-questions-nhs-privatised-2021 Bottom line...it is complicated but if you include GPs and Dentists it is around 25%. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening. The blue “NHS” is already a brand mechanism rather than a single entity. As soon as you introduce the profit motive into healthcare (to create shareholder value) it means only one of two things can happen (or both): 1. They charge more for a service (fleecing taxpayers). 2. They offer a substandard service wrapped up in “efficiency” labels. The NHS does have problems, many caused by our ageing and obese population. Others caused by recruitment and retention problems (exacerbated by removing grants for trainee nurses and doctors along with real term pay cuts). However, these problems are made worse by the requirement to extract profit for those areas already privatised. It will only get worse. Sonwhat percentage of the NHS budget goes tk the private sector. What's the change over the years since 1980? Interested in seeing these figures. As it should be reflected in them wouldn't you agree? Surprised you don’t already have all that data? Surely worth a few FOIs Morley?" I wanted to see if you'd done the research. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening. The blue “NHS” is already a brand mechanism rather than a single entity. As soon as you introduce the profit motive into healthcare (to create shareholder value) it means only one of two things can happen (or both): 1. They charge more for a service (fleecing taxpayers). 2. They offer a substandard service wrapped up in “efficiency” labels. The NHS does have problems, many caused by our ageing and obese population. Others caused by recruitment and retention problems (exacerbated by removing grants for trainee nurses and doctors along with real term pay cuts). However, these problems are made worse by the requirement to extract profit for those areas already privatised. It will only get worse. Sonwhat percentage of the NHS budget goes tk the private sector. What's the change over the years since 1980? Interested in seeing these figures. As it should be reflected in them wouldn't you agree? Surprised you don’t already have all that data? Surely worth a few FOIs Morley? I hope this link is allowed (sorry mods if not) https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/articles/big-election-questions-nhs-privatised-2021 Bottom line...it is complicated but if you include GPs and Dentists it is around 25%. " So dentists and GPS. I certainly.hope we aren't blaming the Conservatives for this! There was a MAJOR policy change under Blair regarding GPS and dentists. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening. The blue “NHS” is already a brand mechanism rather than a single entity. As soon as you introduce the profit motive into healthcare (to create shareholder value) it means only one of two things can happen (or both): 1. They charge more for a service (fleecing taxpayers). 2. They offer a substandard service wrapped up in “efficiency” labels. The NHS does have problems, many caused by our ageing and obese population. Others caused by recruitment and retention problems (exacerbated by removing grants for trainee nurses and doctors along with real term pay cuts). However, these problems are made worse by the requirement to extract profit for those areas already privatised. It will only get worse. Sonwhat percentage of the NHS budget goes tk the private sector. What's the change over the years since 1980? Interested in seeing these figures. As it should be reflected in them wouldn't you agree? Surprised you don’t already have all that data? Surely worth a few FOIs Morley? I wanted to see if you'd done the research. " Ah the self appointed arbiter of who is allowed to have opinions and comments! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening. The blue “NHS” is already a brand mechanism rather than a single entity. As soon as you introduce the profit motive into healthcare (to create shareholder value) it means only one of two things can happen (or both): 1. They charge more for a service (fleecing taxpayers). 2. They offer a substandard service wrapped up in “efficiency” labels. The NHS does have problems, many caused by our ageing and obese population. Others caused by recruitment and retention problems (exacerbated by removing grants for trainee nurses and doctors along with real term pay cuts). However, these problems are made worse by the requirement to extract profit for those areas already privatised. It will only get worse. Sonwhat percentage of the NHS budget goes tk the private sector. What's the change over the years since 1980? Interested in seeing these figures. As it should be reflected in them wouldn't you agree? Surprised you don’t already have all that data? Surely worth a few FOIs Morley? I hope this link is allowed (sorry mods if not) https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/articles/big-election-questions-nhs-privatised-2021 Bottom line...it is complicated but if you include GPs and Dentists it is around 25%. So dentists and GPS. I certainly.hope we aren't blaming the Conservatives for this! There was a MAJOR policy change under Blair regarding GPS and dentists." I haven’t commented on any political party. I commented on the already part privatisation of the NHS. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening. The blue “NHS” is already a brand mechanism rather than a single entity. As soon as you introduce the profit motive into healthcare (to create shareholder value) it means only one of two things can happen (or both): 1. They charge more for a service (fleecing taxpayers). 2. They offer a substandard service wrapped up in “efficiency” labels. The NHS does have problems, many caused by our ageing and obese population. Others caused by recruitment and retention problems (exacerbated by removing grants for trainee nurses and doctors along with real term pay cuts). However, these problems are made worse by the requirement to extract profit for those areas already privatised. It will only get worse. Sonwhat percentage of the NHS budget goes tk the private sector. What's the change over the years since 1980? Interested in seeing these figures. As it should be reflected in them wouldn't you agree? Surprised you don’t already have all that data? Surely worth a few FOIs Morley? I wanted to see if you'd done the research. Ah the self appointed arbiter of who is allowed to have opinions and comments!" Just wanted to make sure you'd read. Up. Unlike many other times.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening. The blue “NHS” is already a brand mechanism rather than a single entity. As soon as you introduce the profit motive into healthcare (to create shareholder value) it means only one of two things can happen (or both): 1. They charge more for a service (fleecing taxpayers). 2. They offer a substandard service wrapped up in “efficiency” labels. The NHS does have problems, many caused by our ageing and obese population. Others caused by recruitment and retention problems (exacerbated by removing grants for trainee nurses and doctors along with real term pay cuts). However, these problems are made worse by the requirement to extract profit for those areas already privatised. It will only get worse. Sonwhat percentage of the NHS budget goes tk the private sector. What's the change over the years since 1980? Interested in seeing these figures. As it should be reflected in them wouldn't you agree? Surprised you don’t already have all that data? Surely worth a few FOIs Morley? I hope this link is allowed (sorry mods if not) https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/articles/big-election-questions-nhs-privatised-2021 Bottom line...it is complicated but if you include GPs and Dentists it is around 25%. So dentists and GPS. I certainly.hope we aren't blaming the Conservatives for this! There was a MAJOR policy change under Blair regarding GPS and dentists. I haven’t commented on any political party. I commented on the already part privatisation of the NHS. " Ag good. Then atleast we can agree. It's not beginning now. But began under the new Labour reforms some 20 years ago.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening. The blue “NHS” is already a brand mechanism rather than a single entity. As soon as you introduce the profit motive into healthcare (to create shareholder value) it means only one of two things can happen (or both): 1. They charge more for a service (fleecing taxpayers). 2. They offer a substandard service wrapped up in “efficiency” labels. The NHS does have problems, many caused by our ageing and obese population. Others caused by recruitment and retention problems (exacerbated by removing grants for trainee nurses and doctors along with real term pay cuts). However, these problems are made worse by the requirement to extract profit for those areas already privatised. It will only get worse. Sonwhat percentage of the NHS budget goes tk the private sector. What's the change over the years since 1980? Interested in seeing these figures. As it should be reflected in them wouldn't you agree? Surprised you don’t already have all that data? Surely worth a few FOIs Morley? I wanted to see if you'd done the research. Ah the self appointed arbiter of who is allowed to have opinions and comments! Just wanted to make sure you'd read. Up. Unlike many other times. "Again that self appointed arbiter role. Quite prone to exaggeration Morley! It really seems to matter to you what people post on a forum on a swinger website. I wonder why you find this so important? Personally couldn’t give a fuck. I have my opinions and if I fancy it I will post them! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening. The blue “NHS” is already a brand mechanism rather than a single entity. As soon as you introduce the profit motive into healthcare (to create shareholder value) it means only one of two things can happen (or both): 1. They charge more for a service (fleecing taxpayers). 2. They offer a substandard service wrapped up in “efficiency” labels. The NHS does have problems, many caused by our ageing and obese population. Others caused by recruitment and retention problems (exacerbated by removing grants for trainee nurses and doctors along with real term pay cuts). However, these problems are made worse by the requirement to extract profit for those areas already privatised. It will only get worse. Sonwhat percentage of the NHS budget goes tk the private sector. What's the change over the years since 1980? Interested in seeing these figures. As it should be reflected in them wouldn't you agree? Surprised you don’t already have all that data? Surely worth a few FOIs Morley? I wanted to see if you'd done the research. Ah the self appointed arbiter of who is allowed to have opinions and comments! Just wanted to make sure you'd read. Up. Unlike many other times.
Again that self appointed arbiter role. Quite prone to exaggeration Morley! It really seems to matter to you what people post on a forum on a swinger website. I wonder why you find this so important? Personally couldn’t give a fuck. I have my opinions and if I fancy it I will post them! "And when they are factually wrong. I shall correct | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening. The blue “NHS” is already a brand mechanism rather than a single entity. As soon as you introduce the profit motive into healthcare (to create shareholder value) it means only one of two things can happen (or both): 1. They charge more for a service (fleecing taxpayers). 2. They offer a substandard service wrapped up in “efficiency” labels. The NHS does have problems, many caused by our ageing and obese population. Others caused by recruitment and retention problems (exacerbated by removing grants for trainee nurses and doctors along with real term pay cuts). However, these problems are made worse by the requirement to extract profit for those areas already privatised. It will only get worse. Sonwhat percentage of the NHS budget goes tk the private sector. What's the change over the years since 1980? Interested in seeing these figures. As it should be reflected in them wouldn't you agree? Surprised you don’t already have all that data? Surely worth a few FOIs Morley? I hope this link is allowed (sorry mods if not) https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/articles/big-election-questions-nhs-privatised-2021 Bottom line...it is complicated but if you include GPs and Dentists it is around 25%. So dentists and GPS. I certainly.hope we aren't blaming the Conservatives for this! There was a MAJOR policy change under Blair regarding GPS and dentists. I haven’t commented on any political party. I commented on the already part privatisation of the NHS. Ag good. Then atleast we can agree. It's not beginning now. But began under the new Labour reforms some 20 years ago. "Which was clearly and obviously one of the key points in MY post, ie where I said... “Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening.” The other point is that this process could now accelerate as things are getting so bad there will be public outcry and a softening of attitude towards privatisation. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening. The blue “NHS” is already a brand mechanism rather than a single entity. As soon as you introduce the profit motive into healthcare (to create shareholder value) it means only one of two things can happen (or both): 1. They charge more for a service (fleecing taxpayers). 2. They offer a substandard service wrapped up in “efficiency” labels. The NHS does have problems, many caused by our ageing and obese population. Others caused by recruitment and retention problems (exacerbated by removing grants for trainee nurses and doctors along with real term pay cuts). However, these problems are made worse by the requirement to extract profit for those areas already privatised. It will only get worse. Sonwhat percentage of the NHS budget goes tk the private sector. What's the change over the years since 1980? Interested in seeing these figures. As it should be reflected in them wouldn't you agree? Surprised you don’t already have all that data? Surely worth a few FOIs Morley? I wanted to see if you'd done the research. Ah the self appointed arbiter of who is allowed to have opinions and comments! Just wanted to make sure you'd read. Up. Unlike many other times.
Again that self appointed arbiter role. Quite prone to exaggeration Morley! It really seems to matter to you what people post on a forum on a swinger website. I wonder why you find this so important? Personally couldn’t give a fuck. I have my opinions and if I fancy it I will post them!
And when they are factually wrong.
I shall correct "Feel free I live to learn! You must have a lot of free time on your hands to do all that research though! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening. The blue “NHS” is already a brand mechanism rather than a single entity. As soon as you introduce the profit motive into healthcare (to create shareholder value) it means only one of two things can happen (or both): 1. They charge more for a service (fleecing taxpayers). 2. They offer a substandard service wrapped up in “efficiency” labels. The NHS does have problems, many caused by our ageing and obese population. Others caused by recruitment and retention problems (exacerbated by removing grants for trainee nurses and doctors along with real term pay cuts). However, these problems are made worse by the requirement to extract profit for those areas already privatised. It will only get worse. Sonwhat percentage of the NHS budget goes tk the private sector. What's the change over the years since 1980? Interested in seeing these figures. As it should be reflected in them wouldn't you agree? Surprised you don’t already have all that data? Surely worth a few FOIs Morley? I hope this link is allowed (sorry mods if not) https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/articles/big-election-questions-nhs-privatised-2021 Bottom line...it is complicated but if you include GPs and Dentists it is around 25%. So dentists and GPS. I certainly.hope we aren't blaming the Conservatives for this! There was a MAJOR policy change under Blair regarding GPS and dentists. I haven’t commented on any political party. I commented on the already part privatisation of the NHS. Ag good. Then atleast we can agree. It's not beginning now. But began under the new Labour reforms some 20 years ago.
Which was clearly and obviously one of the key points in MY post, ie where I said...
“Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening.”
The other point is that this process could now accelerate as things are getting so bad there will be public outcry and a softening of attitude towards privatisation. "There is a law in place the tories would have to repeal for that acceleration to begin. But in 12 years of Tory rule I think the total NHS private spend increased less than 2% | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So if Virgin provides a service to the NHS which completes that task at a cost, but that cost is cheaper than what it would have been if the service was only carried out by the NHS is that OK?" Is this a hypothetical question? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening. The blue “NHS” is already a brand mechanism rather than a single entity. As soon as you introduce the profit motive into healthcare (to create shareholder value) it means only one of two things can happen (or both): 1. They charge more for a service (fleecing taxpayers). 2. They offer a substandard service wrapped up in “efficiency” labels. The NHS does have problems, many caused by our ageing and obese population. Others caused by recruitment and retention problems (exacerbated by removing grants for trainee nurses and doctors along with real term pay cuts). However, these problems are made worse by the requirement to extract profit for those areas already privatised. It will only get worse. Sonwhat percentage of the NHS budget goes tk the private sector. What's the change over the years since 1980? Interested in seeing these figures. As it should be reflected in them wouldn't you agree? Surprised you don’t already have all that data? Surely worth a few FOIs Morley? I hope this link is allowed (sorry mods if not) https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/articles/big-election-questions-nhs-privatised-2021 Bottom line...it is complicated but if you include GPs and Dentists it is around 25%. So dentists and GPS. I certainly.hope we aren't blaming the Conservatives for this! There was a MAJOR policy change under Blair regarding GPS and dentists. I haven’t commented on any political party. I commented on the already part privatisation of the NHS. Ag good. Then atleast we can agree. It's not beginning now. But began under the new Labour reforms some 20 years ago.
Which was clearly and obviously one of the key points in MY post, ie where I said...
“Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening.”
The other point is that this process could now accelerate as things are getting so bad there will be public outcry and a softening of attitude towards privatisation.
There is a law in place the tories would have to repeal for that acceleration to begin.
But in 12 years of Tory rule I think the total NHS private spend increased less than 2% "Precisely why those who support privatisation would want to see the NHS failing. It creates an environment where the general public are amenable to change. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So if Virgin provides a service to the NHS which completes that task at a cost, but that cost is cheaper than what it would have been if the service was only carried out by the NHS is that OK? Is this a hypothetical question? " When did Virgin Healthcare become a charity? Doubt shareholders will accept anything being done at cost! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So if Virgin provides a service to the NHS which completes that task at a cost, but that cost is cheaper than what it would have been if the service was only carried out by the NHS is that OK? Is this a hypothetical question? When did Virgin Healthcare become a charity? Doubt shareholders will accept anything being done at cost!" Maybe I worded that wrong. The question is if Virgin provide a service at a Price. In that price Virgin still made a profit on that service but that price was still lower than what it would have cost if the service was completed solely by the NHS. Is that acceptable? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So if Virgin provides a service to the NHS which completes that task at a cost, but that cost is cheaper than what it would have been if the service was only carried out by the NHS is that OK? Is this a hypothetical question? When did Virgin Healthcare become a charity? Doubt shareholders will accept anything being done at cost! Maybe I worded that wrong. The question is if Virgin provide a service at a Price. In that price Virgin still made a profit on that service but that price was still lower than what it would have cost if the service was completed solely by the NHS. Is that acceptable? " The simple answer is yes. The more complicated answer is, will this always be the case (and how will we know if it replaces the NHS so no ability for comparisons in future) or will it be an “introductory offer” until there is no alternative? How will we know if the service will continue to be of the same quality? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Be very careful what you wish for or you think will be a better deal . Private Health Care providers are only interested in doing ops etc where they can make a profit, I have waited months now for a knee replacement that a Private Health Care provider decided they wouldn't do, why,because of my age and a slightly higher bmi than they wanted, leading to a risk of complications, the consultant said the BMI is outdated but gives the Private sector an excuse NOT to do the replacement if they feel there could be complications and added costs, he referred me to the NHS hospital to have it done , and guess which consultant I saw , yes the same one that was at the Private Hospital. Now having to wait again to have it done. Think very carefully ." Indeed! Those advocating health insurance approach never seem to address issues like the one you describe or they won’t insure against pre-existing conditions or hereditary conditions or lifestyle related conditions. Plus policies are not open ended, most will have a ceiling on the costs they will cover within a certain period. They will have clauses that may not cover all the aftercare or lifetime supply of drugs you may need following intervention. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My opinion (just opinion) is that the NHS should be 100% focused on life saving and essential healthcare. All elective or cosmetic surgery (except as a result of an accident, ie burns or limb loss etc) should not be covered. I am sure there is nuance and counter arguments that I would need to consider but as a general approach that seems to make sense to me. An absolute condition of entry to the UK from abroad should be proven health insurance to reduce health tourism. That should apply to anybody who is emigrating to the UK for work/coming to work for a company under a visa scheme (granting of visa dependent on 2yrs health insurance)." So going on your last post when the NHS was invented in 1948 what cover was intended? I'm guessing it was based on your 1st paragraph. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My opinion (just opinion) is that the NHS should be 100% focused on life saving and essential healthcare. All elective or cosmetic surgery (except as a result of an accident, ie burns or limb loss etc) should not be covered. I am sure there is nuance and counter arguments that I would need to consider but as a general approach that seems to make sense to me. An absolute condition of entry to the UK from abroad should be proven health insurance to reduce health tourism. That should apply to anybody who is emigrating to the UK for work/coming to work for a company under a visa scheme (granting of visa dependent on 2yrs health insurance). So going on your last post when the NHS was invented in 1948 what cover was intended? I'm guessing it was based on your 1st paragraph." No idea, would have to do some reading. However, I would say it is safe to say that in 1948 there was indeed less elective and little cosmetic surgery undertaken, in part because the technology and know how had not yet been invented? It is a very tricky subject and I would be out of my depth, but I think we (the UK) needs a discussion over what really is essential and life saving vs life enhancing vs vanity etc. It must be a very hard call to make on whether, for example, gender reassignment should be provided by the NHS? While there is no threat to physical health of being in the wrong body from birth, there will be issues for mental health. As I said, out of my depth on that one and certainly not intending to offend anyone from the trans community. It just isn’t something I have first hand knowledge or experience of. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My opinion (just opinion) is that the NHS should be 100% focused on life saving and essential healthcare. All elective or cosmetic surgery (except as a result of an accident, ie burns or limb loss etc) should not be covered." I basically agree with you, but can you give some examples of elective or cosmetic surgery which the NHS provides, that you feel should not be covered (avoiding gender stuff, we don't want the thread de-railed). I know there are some surprising stories out there, but I don't think that there's that much to cut away in the area of non-essential surgery. I'm ready to be proved wrong. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My opinion (just opinion) is that the NHS should be 100% focused on life saving and essential healthcare. All elective or cosmetic surgery (except as a result of an accident, ie burns or limb loss etc) should not be covered. I basically agree with you, but can you give some examples of elective or cosmetic surgery which the NHS provides, that you feel should not be covered (avoiding gender stuff, we don't want the thread de-railed). I know there are some surprising stories out there, but I don't think that there's that much to cut away in the area of non-essential surgery. I'm ready to be proved wrong." Can you? Not sure I have the time or inclination. However, pretty sure you can have a benign mole removed on the NHS. As I said in another post, there will be questions regarding to impact on mental health. I used gender reassignment as a (possibly) extreme example. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Never in it's long history has the NHS been fully independent of the private sector; to suggest that outsourcing to the private sector is a new concept is disingenuous. For the NHS to be totally independent it would need to operate it's own construction division to build hospitals, it's own pharmaceutical division to develop drugs, it's own clothing division to make uniforms and so forth. None of these facets have ever been part of the NHS, they have always been outsourced or 'privatised'." I don’t think anyone is saying that. Nor does anyone expect the NHS to have a construction division or be a clothing manufacturer. That is plain silly. The Navy do not build their own ships. The police do not make their own cars etc etc But many will argue the delivery of primary and secondary healthcare should be provided by a stare owned NHS. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So if Virgin provides a service to the NHS which completes that task at a cost, but that cost is cheaper than what it would have been if the service was only carried out by the NHS is that OK? Is this a hypothetical question? When did Virgin Healthcare become a charity? Doubt shareholders will accept anything being done at cost!" They have been running their health service side as non profit since inception. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The NHS is broken. Discussing alternative thinking for our health services is a step in the right direction, but I think those who blindly hold misguided faith in the national health service will delay any meaningful progress in the short term." Correction - they are intentionally breaking the NHS. I don't see losing free healthcare as progress of any kind. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening. The blue “NHS” is already a brand mechanism rather than a single entity. As soon as you introduce the profit motive into healthcare (to create shareholder value) it means only one of two things can happen (or both): 1. They charge more for a service (fleecing taxpayers). 2. They offer a substandard service wrapped up in “efficiency” labels. The NHS does have problems, many caused by our ageing and obese population. Others caused by recruitment and retention problems (exacerbated by removing grants for trainee nurses and doctors along with real term pay cuts). However, these problems are made worse by the requirement to extract profit for those areas already privatised. It will only get worse. Sonwhat percentage of the NHS budget goes tk the private sector. What's the change over the years since 1980? Interested in seeing these figures. As it should be reflected in them wouldn't you agree? Surprised you don’t already have all that data? Surely worth a few FOIs Morley? I hope this link is allowed (sorry mods if not) https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/articles/big-election-questions-nhs-privatised-2021 Bottom line...it is complicated but if you include GPs and Dentists it is around 25%. So dentists and GPS. I certainly.hope we aren't blaming the Conservatives for this! There was a MAJOR policy change under Blair regarding GPS and dentists. I haven’t commented on any political party. I commented on the already part privatisation of the NHS. Ag good. Then atleast we can agree. It's not beginning now. But began under the new Labour reforms some 20 years ago.
Which was clearly and obviously one of the key points in MY post, ie where I said...
“Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening.”
The other point is that this process could now accelerate as things are getting so bad there will be public outcry and a softening of attitude towards privatisation.
There is a law in place the tories would have to repeal for that acceleration to begin.
But in 12 years of Tory rule I think the total NHS private spend increased less than 2%
Precisely why those who support privatisation would want to see the NHS failing. It creates an environment where the general public are amenable to change."As I say. The law would have to change for more money to go to private it was capped early on in Cameron reign. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My opinion (just opinion) is that the NHS should be 100% focused on life saving and essential healthcare. All elective or cosmetic surgery (except as a result of an accident, ie burns or limb loss etc) should not be covered." "I basically agree with you, but can you give some examples of elective or cosmetic surgery which the NHS provides, that you feel should not be covered ... " "Can you?" Well, no. That's my point. I used to think the same way as you. But when I was challenged on it, I was unable to come up with many areas that should be removed. Apart from the obvious gender issues stuff, I can't come up with anything that the NHS does as standard that should be stopped. "pretty sure you can have a benign mole removed on the NHS." I'm not so sure. I've been told that I can't have something removed because it's not important. If you have a small growth that is causing you difficulty (say, it's rubbing against clothing and getting infected), then you can have it cut off. But if it's not a problem, they won't do it. As I say, I have little knowledge in this area, so I'd be pleased to have someone point out something that the NHS does that could be avoided. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening. The blue “NHS” is already a brand mechanism rather than a single entity. As soon as you introduce the profit motive into healthcare (to create shareholder value) it means only one of two things can happen (or both): 1. They charge more for a service (fleecing taxpayers). 2. They offer a substandard service wrapped up in “efficiency” labels. The NHS does have problems, many caused by our ageing and obese population. Others caused by recruitment and retention problems (exacerbated by removing grants for trainee nurses and doctors along with real term pay cuts). However, these problems are made worse by the requirement to extract profit for those areas already privatised. It will only get worse. Sonwhat percentage of the NHS budget goes tk the private sector. What's the change over the years since 1980? Interested in seeing these figures. As it should be reflected in them wouldn't you agree? Surprised you don’t already have all that data? Surely worth a few FOIs Morley? I hope this link is allowed (sorry mods if not) https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/articles/big-election-questions-nhs-privatised-2021 Bottom line...it is complicated but if you include GPs and Dentists it is around 25%. So dentists and GPS. I certainly.hope we aren't blaming the Conservatives for this! There was a MAJOR policy change under Blair regarding GPS and dentists. I haven’t commented on any political party. I commented on the already part privatisation of the NHS. Ag good. Then atleast we can agree. It's not beginning now. But began under the new Labour reforms some 20 years ago.
Which was clearly and obviously one of the key points in MY post, ie where I said...
“Large chunks of the NHS is already privatised. Virgin Healthcare are one of the major beneficiaries. The outsourcing of all facilities management is another. NHS blood plasma supplier, Plasma Resources UK, is another. ie piecemeal privatisation already happened/happening.”
The other point is that this process could now accelerate as things are getting so bad there will be public outcry and a softening of attitude towards privatisation.
There is a law in place the tories would have to repeal for that acceleration to begin.
But in 12 years of Tory rule I think the total NHS private spend increased less than 2%
Precisely why those who support privatisation would want to see the NHS failing. It creates an environment where the general public are amenable to change.
As I say. The law would have to change for more money to go to private it was capped early on in Cameron reign."Yep and if you create a receptive environment then laws have more chance of being passed. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So if Virgin provides a service to the NHS which completes that task at a cost, but that cost is cheaper than what it would have been if the service was only carried out by the NHS is that OK? Is this a hypothetical question? When did Virgin Healthcare become a charity? Doubt shareholders will accept anything being done at cost! They have been running their health service side as non profit since inception. " Are you sure? A quick google search shows that they claim to have not made a profit but they are not set up as a “not for profit”. That’s a big difference. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So if Virgin provides a service to the NHS which completes that task at a cost, but that cost is cheaper than what it would have been if the service was only carried out by the NHS is that OK? Is this a hypothetical question? When did Virgin Healthcare become a charity? Doubt shareholders will accept anything being done at cost! They have been running their health service side as non profit since inception. Are you sure? A quick google search shows that they claim to have not made a profit but they are not set up as a “not for profit”. That’s a big difference." It's been going since 2012 under virgin. It's not made a profit. I didn't day it was a " not for profit organisation" But glad we agree. They haven't made a profit for 10 years. Though the new owner may change this. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The NHS is broken. Discussing alternative thinking for our health services is a step in the right direction, but I think those who blindly hold misguided faith in the national health service will delay any meaningful progress in the short term. Correction - they are intentionally breaking the NHS. I don't see losing free healthcare as progress of any kind." Correction? 
Oh dear, how are “they” intentionally breaking the NHS? Let’s see your facts, figures and how the strategy is going against plan, I will then be happy to have the correction….
It is this mindset you have that stifles the grown up thinking needed to develop a better, fit for purpose health service for the country. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So if Virgin provides a service to the NHS which completes that task at a cost, but that cost is cheaper than what it would have been if the service was only carried out by the NHS is that OK? Is this a hypothetical question? When did Virgin Healthcare become a charity? Doubt shareholders will accept anything being done at cost! They have been running their health service side as non profit since inception. Are you sure? A quick google search shows that they claim to have not made a profit but they are not set up as a “not for profit”. That’s a big difference." Is it Virgin, or have they leased the Virgin brand name? RB makes most of his money by allowing businesses to use the Virgin name, great if you want a brand that has a public positive image | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My opinion (just opinion) is that the NHS should be 100% focused on life saving and essential healthcare. All elective or cosmetic surgery (except as a result of an accident, ie burns or limb loss etc) should not be covered. I basically agree with you, but can you give some examples of elective or cosmetic surgery which the NHS provides, that you feel should not be covered ... Can you? Well, no. That's my point. I used to think the same way as you. But when I was challenged on it, I was unable to come up with many areas that should be removed. Apart from the obvious gender issues stuff, I can't come up with anything that the NHS does as standard that should be stopped. pretty sure you can have a benign mole removed on the NHS. I'm not so sure. I've been told that I can't have something removed because it's not important. If you have a small growth that is causing you difficulty (say, it's rubbing against clothing and getting infected), then you can have it cut off. But if it's not a problem, they won't do it. As I say, I have little knowledge in this area, so I'd be pleased to have someone point out something that the NHS does that could be avoided." Yes, my husband had 2 moles removed. I offered to hack them out myself in the shed with him biting down on a leather belt but he refused my offer and surgical expertise. He instead convinced his GP they itched a bit, what a drama queen. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the Tories ultimate aim privatisation of the NHS. See Scotland are planning to charge wealthy person for access to NHS. I presume that this is the precursor to means tested treatment. For all, those that work hard and lucky enough to earn a decent wage will be hammered no doubt. Those super wealthy who paying for medical treatment would be a drop in the ocean aren't going to be effected. But I've no doubt that five/ ten years hence maybe sooner even those working their arses off and just about surviving will end up paying. With an American style insurance system introduced. Yet guarantee that we will still have to pay taxes,NI etc.." Last time I looked the Tories were not running Scotland. Best have a word with Nicola. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So if Virgin provides a service to the NHS which completes that task at a cost, but that cost is cheaper than what it would have been if the service was only carried out by the NHS is that OK? Is this a hypothetical question? When did Virgin Healthcare become a charity? Doubt shareholders will accept anything being done at cost! They have been running their health service side as non profit since inception. Are you sure? A quick google search shows that they claim to have not made a profit but they are not set up as a “not for profit”. That’s a big difference. It's been going since 2012 under virgin. It's not made a profit. I didn't day it was a " not for profit organisation" But glad we agree. They haven't made a profit for 10 years. Though the new owner may change this." Ah so you didn’t mean what was implied. When you said “running their health service side as non profit since inception” you actually meant “since the company started they have not made a profit”. Language and how you frame something matters. It was implicit in how you framed it that there was some charitable altruism at play. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the Tories ultimate aim privatisation of the NHS. See Scotland are planning to charge wealthy person for access to NHS. I presume that this is the precursor to means tested treatment. For all, those that work hard and lucky enough to earn a decent wage will be hammered no doubt. Those super wealthy who paying for medical treatment would be a drop in the ocean aren't going to be effected. But I've no doubt that five/ ten years hence maybe sooner even those working their arses off and just about surviving will end up paying. With an American style insurance system introduced. Yet guarantee that we will still have to pay taxes,NI etc.." From what I read it was just part of a discussion at a meeting. Also discussed was changing some things that are currently free to a charged service. I doubt the SNP will enact this. It would not look great on them to change the philosophy of the NHS. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So if Virgin provides a service to the NHS which completes that task at a cost, but that cost is cheaper than what it would have been if the service was only carried out by the NHS is that OK? Is this a hypothetical question? When did Virgin Healthcare become a charity? Doubt shareholders will accept anything being done at cost! Maybe I worded that wrong. The question is if Virgin provide a service at a Price. In that price Virgin still made a profit on that service but that price was still lower than what it would have cost if the service was completed solely by the NHS. Is that acceptable? " It certainly sounds acceptable though as it is a private company there is always the risk of hiking the prices or going bust. There would need to be legal safeguards in case they did go bust. It would be interesting to see a direct comparison between Virgin and NHS | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So if Virgin provides a service to the NHS which completes that task at a cost, but that cost is cheaper than what it would have been if the service was only carried out by the NHS is that OK? Is this a hypothetical question? When did Virgin Healthcare become a charity? Doubt shareholders will accept anything being done at cost! They have been running their health service side as non profit since inception. Are you sure? A quick google search shows that they claim to have not made a profit but they are not set up as a “not for profit”. That’s a big difference. Is it Virgin, or have they leased the Virgin brand name? RB makes most of his money by allowing businesses to use the Virgin name, great if you want a brand that has a public positive image" It was virgin. It's now been sold in 2021 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So if Virgin provides a service to the NHS which completes that task at a cost, but that cost is cheaper than what it would have been if the service was only carried out by the NHS is that OK? Is this a hypothetical question? When did Virgin Healthcare become a charity? Doubt shareholders will accept anything being done at cost! They have been running their health service side as non profit since inception. Are you sure? A quick google search shows that they claim to have not made a profit but they are not set up as a “not for profit”. That’s a big difference. It's been going since 2012 under virgin. It's not made a profit. I didn't day it was a " not for profit organisation" But glad we agree. They haven't made a profit for 10 years. Though the new owner may change this. Ah so you didn’t mean what was implied. When you said “running their health service side as non profit since inception” you actually meant “since the company started they have not made a profit”. Language and how you frame something matters. It was implicit in how you framed it that there was some charitable altruism at play. " Nope. They made a profit on their activities. They've decided to reinvest it though. If you thought it was the other way round and they were operating poorly. And bot making profits. Then that's a benefit to the nhs and its " not being g sold and privatised" because the providers are working at a loss. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So if Virgin provides a service to the NHS which completes that task at a cost, but that cost is cheaper than what it would have been if the service was only carried out by the NHS is that OK? Is this a hypothetical question? When did Virgin Healthcare become a charity? Doubt shareholders will accept anything being done at cost! They have been running their health service side as non profit since inception. Are you sure? A quick google search shows that they claim to have not made a profit but they are not set up as a “not for profit”. That’s a big difference. It's been going since 2012 under virgin. It's not made a profit. I didn't day it was a " not for profit organisation" But glad we agree. They haven't made a profit for 10 years. Though the new owner may change this. Ah so you didn’t mean what was implied. When you said “running their health service side as non profit since inception” you actually meant “since the company started they have not made a profit”. Language and how you frame something matters. It was implicit in how you framed it that there was some charitable altruism at play. Nope. They made a profit on their activities. They've decided to reinvest it though. If you thought it was the other way round and they were operating poorly. And bot making profits. Then that's a benefit to the nhs and its " not being g sold and privatised" because the providers are working at a loss. " That reinvestment enabled them to pay £0 corporation tax on over £2bn of contracts. The concept is simple. A series of apparent loss leader contracts hoping to force the prices up and cash in later. That is why it was sold. The new owners are looking forward to £££s | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the Tories ultimate aim privatisation of the NHS. See Scotland are planning to charge wealthy person for access to NHS. I presume that this is the precursor to means tested treatment. For all, those that work hard and lucky enough to earn a decent wage will be hammered no doubt. Those super wealthy who paying for medical treatment would be a drop in the ocean aren't going to be effected. But I've no doubt that five/ ten years hence maybe sooner even those working their arses off and just about surviving will end up paying. With an American style insurance system introduced. Yet guarantee that we will still have to pay taxes,NI etc.." You don't know what you've got till it's gone. We're on a slippery slope I hope we can back out of. The country will weep while wondering how we let this happen | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So the Tories ultimate aim privatisation of the NHS. See Scotland are planning to charge wealthy person for access to NHS. I presume that this is the precursor to means tested treatment. For all, those that work hard and lucky enough to earn a decent wage will be hammered no doubt. Those super wealthy who paying for medical treatment would be a drop in the ocean aren't going to be effected. But I've no doubt that five/ ten years hence maybe sooner even those working their arses off and just about surviving will end up paying. With an American style insurance system introduced. Yet guarantee that we will still have to pay taxes,NI etc.. You don't know what you've got till it's gone. We're on a slippery slope I hope we can back out of. The country will weep while wondering how we let this happen " If the SNP do actually do this to Scotland (I think they won't) then like you say they will miss it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So if Virgin provides a service to the NHS which completes that task at a cost, but that cost is cheaper than what it would have been if the service was only carried out by the NHS is that OK? Is this a hypothetical question? When did Virgin Healthcare become a charity? Doubt shareholders will accept anything being done at cost! They have been running their health service side as non profit since inception. Are you sure? A quick google search shows that they claim to have not made a profit but they are not set up as a “not for profit”. That’s a big difference. It's been going since 2012 under virgin. It's not made a profit. I didn't day it was a " not for profit organisation" But glad we agree. They haven't made a profit for 10 years. Though the new owner may change this. Ah so you didn’t mean what was implied. When you said “running their health service side as non profit since inception” you actually meant “since the company started they have not made a profit”. Language and how you frame something matters. It was implicit in how you framed it that there was some charitable altruism at play. Nope. They made a profit on their activities. They've decided to reinvest it though. If you thought it was the other way round and they were operating poorly. And bot making profits. Then that's a benefit to the nhs and its " not being g sold and privatised" because the providers are working at a loss. That reinvestment enabled them to pay £0 corporation tax on over £2bn of contracts. The concept is simple. A series of apparent loss leader contracts hoping to force the prices up and cash in later. That is why it was sold. The new owners are looking forward to £££s" The re invested it to run things better Or pay better wages. Maybe everybcompany should run at a loss. There seems bonpleasing some people. People are determined to criticise regardless You want a well run service. The nhs outsources from some of this. You want it done cheaper. It does this by out sourcing You want better service. That can only happen through good wages and investment. Then complain that that investment leads to no tax. I genuinely think there's no pleasing some parties out this I hope you've seen how she'll have begun discussing their cancellation of 25bn pf investment in the uk now as a result of the super tax being left in longer. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The NHS was the most efficient in the world till the Torys got their sweaty mitts on it. They hate the NHS on principle." It really wasn't. I would love to see your proof of this. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The NHS was the most efficient in the world till the Torys got their sweaty mitts on it. They hate the NHS on principle. It really wasn't. I would love to see your proof of this. " Which system was more efficient? Why does it always get worse during periods of Tory rule? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The NHS was the most efficient in the world till the Torys got their sweaty mitts on it. They hate the NHS on principle. It really wasn't. I would love to see your proof of this. " It really was | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The NHS was the most efficient in the world till the Torys got their sweaty mitts on it. They hate the NHS on principle. It really wasn't. I would love to see your proof of this. " One of the agreed key measures of performance for the NHS are patient waiting times (for operations). Courtesy of Commons Library... “Waiting lists: 2.5 million people were waiting for hospital treatment in 2010. This rose to 4.6 million in September 2019, the highest number to date. The waiting time target, which states that 92% of those on the waiting list should have been waiting for under 18 weeks, hasn't been met since early 2016.” The dates there are key. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The NHS was the most efficient in the world till the Torys got their sweaty mitts on it. They hate the NHS on principle. It really wasn't. I would love to see your proof of this. One of the agreed key measures of performance for the NHS are patient waiting times (for operations). Courtesy of Commons Library... “Waiting lists: 2.5 million people were waiting for hospital treatment in 2010. This rose to 4.6 million in September 2019, the highest number to date. The waiting time target, which states that 92% of those on the waiting list should have been waiting for under 18 weeks, hasn't been met since early 2016.” The dates there are key." You can’t argue with facts | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So if Virgin provides a service to the NHS which completes that task at a cost, but that cost is cheaper than what it would have been if the service was only carried out by the NHS is that OK? Is this a hypothetical question? When did Virgin Healthcare become a charity? Doubt shareholders will accept anything being done at cost! They have been running their health service side as non profit since inception. Are you sure? A quick google search shows that they claim to have not made a profit but they are not set up as a “not for profit”. That’s a big difference. It's been going since 2012 under virgin. It's not made a profit. I didn't day it was a " not for profit organisation" But glad we agree. They haven't made a profit for 10 years. Though the new owner may change this. Ah so you didn’t mean what was implied. When you said “running their health service side as non profit since inception” you actually meant “since the company started they have not made a profit”. Language and how you frame something matters. It was implicit in how you framed it that there was some charitable altruism at play. Nope. They made a profit on their activities. They've decided to reinvest it though. If you thought it was the other way round and they were operating poorly. And bot making profits. Then that's a benefit to the nhs and its " not being g sold and privatised" because the providers are working at a loss. That reinvestment enabled them to pay £0 corporation tax on over £2bn of contracts. The concept is simple. A series of apparent loss leader contracts hoping to force the prices up and cash in later. That is why it was sold. The new owners are looking forward to £££s The re invested it to run things better Or pay better wages. Maybe everybcompany should run at a loss. There seems bonpleasing some people. People are determined to criticise regardless You want a well run service. The nhs outsources from some of this. You want it done cheaper. It does this by out sourcing You want better service. That can only happen through good wages and investment. Then complain that that investment leads to no tax. I genuinely think there's no pleasing some parties out this I hope you've seen how she'll have begun discussing their cancellation of 25bn pf investment in the uk now as a result of the super tax being left in longer. " Bigger picture is what matters here and you know it. Virgin Care was sold. It had not made a profit (but only because of reinvesting all profits). So why would the group of Virgin branded healthcare companies be of interest to Twenty20 a venture capital group whose explicit aim is to return substantial shareholder value within three years? Did Branson personally make a profit from selling? I don’t know but interesting to find out. You honestly think all private sector providers to the NHS will accept zero profits and dividends forever? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The NHS was the most efficient in the world till the Torys got their sweaty mitts on it. They hate the NHS on principle. It really wasn't. I would love to see your proof of this. One of the agreed key measures of performance for the NHS are patient waiting times (for operations). Courtesy of Commons Library... “Waiting lists: 2.5 million people were waiting for hospital treatment in 2010. This rose to 4.6 million in September 2019, the highest number to date. The waiting time target, which states that 92% of those on the waiting list should have been waiting for under 18 weeks, hasn't been met since early 2016.” The dates there are key. You can’t argue with facts "No doubt they will be the wrong facts or established/accepted methodology will be flawed  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The NHS was the most efficient in the world till the Torys got their sweaty mitts on it. They hate the NHS on principle. It really wasn't. I would love to see your proof of this. One of the agreed key measures of performance for the NHS are patient waiting times (for operations). Courtesy of Commons Library... “Waiting lists: 2.5 million people were waiting for hospital treatment in 2010. This rose to 4.6 million in September 2019, the highest number to date. The waiting time target, which states that 92% of those on the waiting list should have been waiting for under 18 weeks, hasn't been met since early 2016.” The dates there are key. You can’t argue with facts
No doubt they will be the wrong facts or established/accepted methodology will be flawed "Ha, it will just be denial and deflection | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The NHS was the most efficient in the world till the Torys got their sweaty mitts on it. They hate the NHS on principle. It really wasn't. I would love to see your proof of this. One of the agreed key measures of performance for the NHS are patient waiting times (for operations). Courtesy of Commons Library... “Waiting lists: 2.5 million people were waiting for hospital treatment in 2010. This rose to 4.6 million in September 2019, the highest number to date. The waiting time target, which states that 92% of those on the waiting list should have been waiting for under 18 weeks, hasn't been met since early 2016.” The dates there are key. You can’t argue with facts "What were waiting times like between 1979 and 1997 and between 1997 & 2010. Any money you like waiting times were lower prior to 1997 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The NHS was the most efficient in the world till the Torys got their sweaty mitts on it. They hate the NHS on principle. It really wasn't. I would love to see your proof of this. One of the agreed key measures of performance for the NHS are patient waiting times (for operations). Courtesy of Commons Library... “Waiting lists: 2.5 million people were waiting for hospital treatment in 2010. This rose to 4.6 million in September 2019, the highest number to date. The waiting time target, which states that 92% of those on the waiting list should have been waiting for under 18 weeks, hasn't been met since early 2016.” The dates there are key. You can’t argue with facts
What were waiting times like between 1979 and 1997 and between 1997 & 2010.
Any money you like waiting times were lower prior to 1997"You tell me | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The NHS was the most efficient in the world till the Torys got their sweaty mitts on it. They hate the NHS on principle. It really wasn't. I would love to see your proof of this. One of the agreed key measures of performance for the NHS are patient waiting times (for operations). Courtesy of Commons Library... “Waiting lists: 2.5 million people were waiting for hospital treatment in 2010. This rose to 4.6 million in September 2019, the highest number to date. The waiting time target, which states that 92% of those on the waiting list should have been waiting for under 18 weeks, hasn't been met since early 2016.” The dates there are key. You can’t argue with facts
What were waiting times like between 1979 and 1997 and between 1997 & 2010.
Any money you like waiting times were lower prior to 1997"What is the answer to this question? I would imagine population growth, people living longer and new treatments affect waiting times over the decades. This is just a guess on my part by the way | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My opinion (just opinion) is that the NHS should be 100% focused on life saving and essential healthcare. All elective or cosmetic surgery (except as a result of an accident, ie burns or limb loss etc) should not be covered. I basically agree with you, but can you give some examples of elective or cosmetic surgery which the NHS provides, that you feel should not be covered (avoiding gender stuff, we don't want the thread de-railed). I know there are some surprising stories out there, but I don't think that there's that much to cut away in the area of non-essential surgery. I'm ready to be proved wrong." So would you scrap IVF on the NHS if you want it pay for it. Hard but cost saving. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Ok weird coincidence but earlier in this thread we were talking about treatments offered by NHS that maybe shouldn’t be. In my newsfeed this came up... “Carla Bellucci (from only fans) earned her ‘most hated’ moniker for faking depression to blag a nose job on the NHS and has previously said she only gets the level of abuse she does because she’s hot.” So can you get cosmetic surgery on the NHS by citing mental health issues?" That's the same for some sex change ops it's about mental health. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My opinion (just opinion) is that the NHS should be 100% focused on life saving and essential healthcare. All elective or cosmetic surgery (except as a result of an accident, ie burns or limb loss etc) should not be covered." "I basically agree with you, but can you give some examples of elective or cosmetic surgery which the NHS provides, that you feel should not be covered (avoiding gender stuff, we don't want the thread de-railed). I know there are some surprising stories out there, but I don't think that there's that much to cut away in the area of non-essential surgery. I'm ready to be proved wrong." "So would you scrap IVF on the NHS if you want it pay for it. Hard but cost saving." Oh yes, I'd forgotten about IVF. That's definitely something that the NHS should not be doing. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've worked in the NHS for all my career and conduct private work too. It never ceases to amaze me of some patients insight. They see the NHS as a free system and like lots of things which are free they are seen as having little value and as it has little value we can use and abuse at will. I'm not too sure how many of the commentators on this thread have any actual first hand experience of front line NHS work, think very few. My advice would be to nip along to your local hospital and ask for any volunteer roles. Get stuck into a role and ask yourself in 12 months time the same questions of today. Think you maybe a little surprised at your outcomes. Good luck. "Not sure of the point you are making? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've worked in the NHS for all my career and conduct private work too. It never ceases to amaze me of some patients insight. They see the NHS as a free system and like lots of things which are free they are seen as having little value and as it has little value we can use and abuse at will. I'm not too sure how many of the commentators on this thread have any actual first hand experience of front line NHS work, think very few. My advice would be to nip along to your local hospital and ask for any volunteer roles. Get stuck into a role and ask yourself in 12 months time the same questions of today. Think you maybe a little surprised at your outcomes. Good luck.
Not sure of the point you are making?"Just maybe a stint in one of the places some folks complain about may give a more rounded view. I must say, some of the hospital volunteers I chat to have had a change of view, not all, just some. Think any form of real time insight is valuable. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
